Bishop
Robert Mckenna Beliefs, Heresies and Practices Exposed

This article contains content used from author: Brother Peter Dimond of Most Holy Family Monastery

Robert
Fidelis McKenna, O.P. (born July 8, 1927) is a self-professed
Dominican and traditional Catholic bishop residing at Our Lady of the
Rosary Chapel in Monroe, Connecticut since 1973. He is known for his
supposed traditionalist Catholic positions and is an advocate of
sedeprivationism. He is also known from the Fox TV-movie The
Haunted, which is about the Smurl haunting where McKenna
conducted two exorcisms.

Robert
Mckenna was made a bishop in 1986 by Bishop Guerard des Lauriers who
served as confessor to Pope Pius XII from 1954-1955. Bishop McKenna
continued to say Mass at Our Lady of the Rosary, Monroe, Connecticut,
before retiring in 2011. He has consecrated seven bishops, including
Bishop Donald
Sanborn and was noted popularly as an exorcist.

Bishop
Robert McKenna Exorcisms

This
video
contains an exorcism that was performed by Bishop Robert McKenna (you
can download the file separately here
by right clicking the link and "save link as"). As you can
see in the video, the man could have converted if Bishop
McKenna had explicitly told him that he must become Catholic for
salvation. But amazingly, when someone we know asked Bishop McKenna
if he told this man that he had to become Catholic, McKenna responded
that he only gave the poor man a catechism (he didn’t tell him
he had to convert)! (This is because Bishop McKenna holds the heresy
that non-Catholics can be saved without the Catholic Faith, as we will
see.) Thus, just because a priest is able to perform an exorcism by virtue
of the powers of the priesthood received at his ordination, or any laymen
or priest for that matter by the power of the name of Jesus, it doesn’t
mean that he is a good priest or layman or even an authentic
Catholic, as Our Lord teaches us in Matthew, chapter 7:

“Many will say to me in that day: Lord,
Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and cast
out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? And
then I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you
that work iniquity.” (Matthew 7:22-23)

Nevertheless,
this exorcism shows the powers of the true Catholic priesthood and
traditional Catholic sacramentals against the Devil. And it shows
that the Devil exists and is working assiduously for the ruin of
souls.

Bishop
Robert Mckenna’s Heresies

Bishop
McKenna believe that souls can be saved in false religions, and he
refuses the sacraments to anyone who believes that only baptized
Catholics can be saved. Since he is a notorious heretic who not only
imposes his heretical views upon those at his Masses, but also an
automatically, majorly excommunicated notorious heretic, Catholics
must avoid him and other such pestilential heretics’ Masses and
not receive any sacraments from them under pain of mortal sin.

Automatic
excommunication for all heretics, schismatics and apostates

If
you claim that you can judge a devil-worshiper to be outside the
Church and Communion, then, you can also judge someone who professes
to be a Catholic, yet who holds to one or more heresies. But this is
common sense, unless one is a liar.

Pope
Leo X, Fifth Lateran Council, Session 11 (1512-1517): “THE
PENALTIES TO BE INCURRED, AUTOMATICALLY AND WITHOUT THE NEED
FOR ANY FURTHER DECLARATION, for each
and all of the aforesaid persons, if they act to the contrary (though
may they not!), are immediate major excommunication, the
incapacity for all and singular legal acts of any kind, being branded
as infamous, and the penalties expressed in the law of treason;”

Here
we see Pope Leo X affirming the dogmatic principle that some
penalties are “incurred automatically and without the
need for any further declaration” whenever one has
committed a crime to which such an excommunication is
attached. The 1917 Code of Canon Law lists some of these
crimes:

1917
Code of Canon Law, Canon 2335: “Those who join a Masonic
sect or other societies of the same sort, which plot against the
Church or against legitimate civil authority, incur ipso facto [by
that very fact] an excommunication simply reserved to the Holy See.”

1917
Code of Canon Law, Canon 2314: “All apostates from the
Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic:
1) Incur ipso facto [by that very fact] excommunication…”

Historically,
excommunications were distinguished by the terms major and
minor. Major excommunications were incurred for
heresy and schism (sins against the faith) and certain other major
sins. Those who received major excommunication for heresy were not
members of the Church. Minor excommunication, however, did not
remove one from the Church, but forbade one to participate in the
Church’s sacramental life. Pope Benedict XIV made note of the
distinction.

Pope
Benedict XIV, Ex Quo Primum (# 23), March 1, 1756: “Moreover
heretics and schismatics are subject to the censure of major
excommunication by the law of Can. de Ligu. 23,
quest. 5, and Can. Nulli, 5, dist. 19.”

As
we have seen already, people automatically excommunicated in this way
are majorly excommunicated, which means that they must be
shunnedfor religious purposes and the
sacraments:

St.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Suppl., Part, Q. 23, Art. 1:
“The other is major excommunicationwhich
deprives a man of the sacraments of the Church and of the communion
of the faithful [prayers, religious gatherings, etc.]. WHEREFORE
IT IS NOT LAWFUL TO COMMUNICATE WITH ONE WHO LIES UNDER SUCH AN
EXCOMMUNICATION.”

The
declaratory sentence which follows an automatic excommunication is
merely a legal recognition of something which already exists. If this
were not true, the automatic excommunication would be meaningless.
Canon 2314, of the 1917 Code of Canon Law, although not infallible,
is perfectly in line with Catholic teaching: “All apostates
from the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic: 1)
Incur ipso facto [by that very fact] excommunication…”

Pope
Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943: “For
not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature
to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or
heresy or apostasy.”

Pope
Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896: “The
practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the
unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside
Catholic communion, AND ALIEN TO THE CHURCH, WHOEVER WOULD RECEDE IN
THE LEAST DEGREE FROM ANY POINT OF DOCTRINE PROPOSED BY HER
AUTHORITATIVE MAGISTERIUM.”

Pope
Pius VI, Auctorem fidei, Aug. 28, 1794: “47.
Likewise, the proposition which teaches that it is necessary,
according to the natural and divine laws, for either excommunication
or for suspension, that a personal examination should precede, and
that, therefore, sentences called ‘ipso facto’ have no
other force than that of a serious threat without any actual effect”
– false, rash, pernicious, injurious to the power of the
Church, erroneous.”

The
heretical person is already severed from the Church. Most heretics
are known to be heretics without a trial or declaratory sentence, and
must be denounced as such. As we see here, the Catholic Church
teaches that formal processes and judgments are not necessary for
ipso facto (by that very fact) excommunications
to take effect.

More on
Bishop Robert Mckenna’s Beliefs, Heresies and Practices Exposed

Sedeprivationism

Sedeprivationism
is a term coined by the self-professed British traditionalist
Catholic theologian William J. Morgan for the ideological school or
party of the "traditionalist Roman Catholic movement" that
holds that the "Popes" since John XXIII have been defective
but true "Popes", following the principles of the late
French theologian Michel Louis Guérard des Lauriers, O.P., as
Lauriers set it out in his thesis published in the Cahiers du
Cassiciacum and therefore called the "Cassiciacum
thesis".

According
to Laurier's thesis, "Popes" John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul
I, John Paul II and (implicitly) Benedict XVI and Francis were or are
defective "Popes" in that, due to their supposed espousal
of the "modernist heresy", their consent to become "Pope"
was faulty or defective, so that they became potentially "Pope",
but did not attain to the papacy.

This
idea is also described in another manner by saying that they became
"Pope" materially but not formally (the formula, "papa
materialiter non formaliter").

Two
consequences flow out of this thesis:

There
is no real sede vacante since a man fills the role of
potential Pope;

If
the current potential Pope recants from Modernism and returns to
Catholicism, he will complete the process and attain to the fullness
of the papacy.

The
terms sedeprivationism and sedeprivationist were coined
by the late English Sedevacantist William J. Morgan.

Besides
the late bishop Michel Guerard des Lauriers, O.P., those
Traditionalists prominent for subscribing to this explanation are:
Bishops Robert F. McKenna, O.P. and Donald Sanborn in the U.S.A., and
Fr. Francesco Ricossa and his Istituto Mater Bonii Consilii
(alternative name Sodalitium Pianum), to which Bishop Geert
Jan Stuyver belongs, located in Flanders as well as the cities of
Turin and Rome in Italy.

Cassiciacum
Thesis

Since
being consecrated a bishop, McKenna has been one of the main
promoters of the Cassiciacum Thesis (also called
Sedeprivationism) developed by his consecrator, which states
that the papal claimants since Paul VI have not been true popes due
to their public heresies, but have only been papa materialiter.
According to McKenna, by teaching that men have a "natural
right" to worship as they see fit, the successors of John XXIII
have attempted to put the heresy of ecumenism in place of
Catholicism. Referring to this heresy as "a spiritual insanity,"
he wrote in, On Keeping Catholic:

"Now
while the Popes of Vatican II, including the present Benedict XVI,
can function on the purely natural level in running the Church as an
organization or legal corporation, they have on the supernatural
level - in view of their spiritual madness - no divine authority to
speak for the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ or to govern the
faithful in His name; no power [of jurisdiction], that is to say, to
function precisely as the Vicar of Christ for so long as this
insanity continues. They and the bishops under them, blindly
following them, are lacking the jurisdiction they would otherwise
have under normal circumstances. We must simply ignore them and carry
on as best as we can without them."

Although
he is sometimes classified as a sedevacantist or a sedeprivationist,
McKenna considers himself to be a Roman Catholic bishop just dealing
with the Church crisis of the present day.

The
Heretical Sedeprivationism/Cassiciacum Thesis

The
ridiculous and heretical Formaliter/Materialiter position, also known
as the Sedeprivationism or Cassiciacum Thesis
formulated by the Thucite
Bishop
Michel-Louis Guérard des Lauriers, is not the sedevacante
position, as those who hold it will readily admit. They who hold this
position believe that John Paul II is the pope, and he is not the
pope. They believe he is formally not the pope, meaning he has no
authority or jurisdiction, while at the same time he is materially
the pope, meaning he physically occupies the Chair of Peter; that he
is physically the pope, but not spiritually (no jurisdiction or
power).
Thus they have a body without a soul ruling the Church, a corpse
ruling the Church. That is why it is a ridiculous position, because
it insults common sense. It is also heretical because it denies the
infallible teachings of the Vatican Council of 1870, that a pope has
primacy, supreme power, and jurisdiction over the universal Church.

The
First Vatican Council,
Sess. 4, Chap. 3, July 18, 1870: “1. That Apostolic See and the
Roman Pontiff hold primacy over the whole world… full power to
feed, rule, and guide the universal Church… 9. If
anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of
inspection or direction but not the full and supreme power of
jurisdiction over the universal Church,
not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in
those which pertain to discipline and government… let
him be anathema.”

Thus,
to say that there can be such a thing as a pope without primacy,
supreme power, and jurisdiction is heresy and those who obstinately
teach it despite being aware of this information are heretics. This
is the position, the Cassiciacum
Thesis.

Bishop
McKenna on No Salvation Outside the Church

Bishop
Robert McKenna, “The Boston Snare,” printed in the CMRI’s
Magazine The Reign of Mary, Vol. XXVI, No. 83: “The
doctrine, then, of no salvation outside the Church is to be
understood in the sense of knowingly
outside the Church… But, they may object, if such be the
sense of the dogma in question, why is the word ‘knowingly’
not part of the formula, ‘Outside the Church no salvation’?
For the simple reason that the addition is unnecessary. How
could anyone know of the dogma and not be knowingly outside the
Church? The ‘dogma’ is not so much a doctrine intended
for the instruction of Catholics, since it is but a logical
consequence of the Church’s claim to be the true Church, but
rather a solemn and material warning or declaration for the benefit
of those outside the one ark of salvation.”

Frankly,
this has to be one of the more heretical statements made by a person
purporting to be a traditional Catholic bishop. As can be seen
clearly from these words, Bishop McKenna (like almost every modern
priest) rejects the true meaning of this dogma and holds that
non-Catholics can be saved without the Catholic Faith. In a desperate
attempt to defend his heretical version of Outside the Church
there is no salvation, McKenna admittedly must change the
understanding of the dogmatic formula proclaimed by the popes. He
tells us that the “true” meaning of the dogma is that
only those who are “knowingly” outside the Church
cannot be saved. Oh really? Where was that qualification ever
mentioned in the dogmatic definitions on this topic? Nowhere!

Recognizing
that such an understanding runs contrary to the clear words of the
dogmatic definitions on the topic – none of which ever
mentioned “knowingly” and all of which eliminated all
exceptions – Bishop McKenna attempts to explain away the
problem.

Bishop
Robert Mckenna, “The Boston Snare,” printed in the CMRI’s
Magazine The Reign of Mary, Vol. XXVI, No. 83: “The
‘dogma’ is not so much a doctrine intended for the
instruction of Catholics… but rather a solemn and
material warning or declaration for the benefit of those outside the
one ark of salvation.”

The
dogma Outside the Church there is no salvation, according to
Mckenna and the heretical CMRI which printed this article in
their magazine (Vol. XXIV, No. 83) because they believe the same
thing, is not a truth from Heaven, but a warning or admonition
written for non-Catholics! This is grotesque theological nonsense and
flat out heresy.

Pope
Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3,
1907, #22: “The dogmas which the Church professes as
revealed are not truths fallen from Heaven, but
they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human
mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself.” –
Condemned statement by Pope Pius X

As
we have already seen, dogmas are truths fallen from Heaven
which cannot possibly contain error. They are not merely
human statements written to warn non-Catholics, which are subject to
correction and qualification. Dogmas are infallible definitions of
the truth which can never be changed or corrected, and have no need
to be changed or corrected since they cannot possibly contain error.
Dogmas are defined so that Catholics must know what they must
believe as true from divine revelation without any possibility of
error, which is exactly the opposite of what McKenna and the CMRI
assert.

McKenna
and the CMRI
are compelled to deny that dogmas are truths from Heaven and to
belittle dogmas to fallible “warnings for non-Catholics”
which can be corrected, because they desire to justify their
heretical belief in salvation outside the Church – i.e., those
“unknowingly” outside the Catholic Church
– which belief, as they unwittingly admit by employing such
argumentation, is directly contrary to the clear words of the
dogmatic definitions.

This
is perhaps what is most important about the heresy of Bishop Mckenna
and the CMRI: the dogma deniers – that is, those who believe in
the heresy that “baptism of desire” and “invincible
ignorance” can save those who die as non-Catholics (such as
Bishop McKenna and the CMRI and almost every modern priest whether he
is “traditional” or Novus Ordo) – are revealing by
such ridiculous argumentation that their “version”
of this dogma is incompatible with the words of the dogmatic
definitions; for if their version were compatible with the dogmatic
definitions they would never be forced into heretical statements
such as those above.

Pope
Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on
Revelation, 1870, ex cathedra: “Hence, also, that
understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained,
which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and
there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious
name of a deeper understanding.”

Bishop
McKenna tells us that baptism of desire means that Jews who reject
Christ can be saved

In
a letter published on the internet by Most Holy Family Monastery (see
Most
Holy Family Monastery Exposed)
from Bishop McKenna, McKenna fully explains and exposes his belief in
salvation outside the Church, and that Jews who reject Christ can be
saved. I will quote from his letter:

Bishop
Robert McKenna, to Bro. Peter Dimond, Nov. 25, 2004: “2. I
answer your ‘one simple question’ regarding Fr. Denis
Fahey’s saying, ‘The Jews, as a nation, are
objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete
opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that a member of
the Jewish Nation, who rejects Our Lord, may have the supernatural
life which God wishes to see in every soul, and so be good with
the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking
to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and
therefore is not good. If a Jew who rejects our Lord is good in the
way God demands, it is in spite of the movement in which he and his
nation are engaged.’

“Fr.
Fahey in these words is in fact recognizing Baptism of Desire. I
repeat them, emphasizing what you ignorantly overlook, with (in
parentheses) his implications: “The Jews, as a
nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a
direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It
is possible that (subjectively) a member of the Jewish
Nation, who (objectively) rejects Our Lord, may (subjectively)
have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul
(Sanctifying Grace), and so be good with the goodness God wants, but
objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world
is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not
(objectively) good. If a Jew who rejects our Lord is (subjectively)
good in the way God demands (and therefore, by Baptism of Desire, in
the State of Grace), it is in spite of the movement in which
(objectively) he and his nation are engaged.’ I could not
agree more with what Fr. Fahey says…”

There
you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Fr. Fahey taught that a Jew who
rejects Our Lord can be in the state of grace (and therefore be
saved). Bishop Mckenna acknowledges this and fully agrees with it and
states explicitly that
“Fr. Fahey in these words is in fact recognizing Baptism of
Desire.” This is as heretical as it gets. Baptism of desire,
according to Bishop McKenna and many other false traditionalists,
means that certain Jews who reject Christ can be saved. This is
formal heresy and a denial of the central truth of the Gospel.

1
John 5:11-12: “And this is the testimony, that God hath given
to us eternal life. And this life is in his Son. He
that hath the Son, hath life. He that hath not the Son,
hath not life.”

John
8:23-24: “And he [Jesus] said to them [the Jews]: You are from
beneath, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this
world. Therefore, I said to you, that you shall die in your sins: for
if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin.”

Pope
Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,”
1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church
firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are
outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews
or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go
into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his
angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their
lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such
importance that only those who abide in it do the Church’s
sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other
works of piety and practices of the Christian militia productive of
eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much
he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name
of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the
Catholic Church.”

Pope
Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex
cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above
all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole
and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But
the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity,
and the Trinity in unity... Therefore let him who wishes to be saved,
think thus concerning the Trinity.

“But it is necessary
for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the
incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ...the Son of God is God
and man...– This is the Catholic faith; unless each one
believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

COMMENT

The
quote below is another example of a theologian before Vatican II who
gave the false explanation of ‘baptism of desire,’
according to which one can be justified without being reborn or
having the temporal punishment due to sin remitted. (By the way,
almost all the ‘theologians’ in the years just before
Vatican II also believed that souls could be saved in any religion
and completely repudiated defined salvation dogma.) For those who
aren’t familiar with the Catholic teaching on why it’s
wrong to assert that one can be justified or saved without being
reborn and having the temporal punishment due to sin remitted, see
this article and the quotes below.

The
following explanation is typical of how ‘baptism of desire’
was propounded. This shows, once again, that the doctrine itself is
false. ‘Theologian’ after ‘theologian’ was
simply feeding people a false doctrine. These examples are
significant because the enemies of the necessity of the Catholic
Church in our day base their positions on the views of fallible
pre-Vatican II theologians. In many cases, they were the men whose
errors and heresies paved the way for the Vatican II apostasy.

Adolphe
Tanquerey (d. 1932), A
Manual of Dogmatic Theology.
Vol. II., New
York: Desclee Company, 1959, pp. 227-229.:
“Contrition
or perfect charity, along with at least an implicit desire for
Baptism, supplies for the forces of Baptism of water as to remission
of sins… An implicit desire for Baptism is included in a
general resolution to fulfill all the precepts of God. It is
certainly sufficient in one who is invincibly ignorant of the law of
Baptism; likewise, it very probably is sufficient in one who knows
the need of Baptism. Perfect
charity, together with the desire for Baptism,
indeed remits original sin and actual sins, and in like manner
infuses sanctifying grace; but
it does not imprint the baptismal character,nor
of itself does it remit the entire temporal punishment due to sin.
Wherefore the obligation remains to receive Baptism of water when the
opportunity is given.”

Tanquerey
teaches that one can be justified without having the temporal
punishment due to sin removed. His statement is contrary to Catholic
teaching. The Church teaches that the temporal punishment due to sin
is necessarily removed by the grace of rebirth/baptism, and that one
must have that grace to even be justified. Moreover, the notion that
one can be incorporated into Christ (which is necessary for
justification and salvation) without becoming entirely new (and
therefore having everything taken away) is contrary to the clear
teaching of the New Testament on the new birth. ‘Baptism of
desire’ is opposed to dogmatic teaching and the clear testimony
of Holy Scripture.

Pope
Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov.
22, 1439: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual
life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we
are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And
since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless
we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the
Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’
[John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water…
The
effect of this sacrament is the remission of every fault, original
and actual, and also of every punishment which is owed for the fault
itself.
Therefore
to the baptized no satisfaction is to be enjoined for past sins; but
dying, before they commit any fault, they immediately attain the
kingdom of heaven and the vision of God.”

Notice,
the effect of rebirth or baptism is that everything is removed (the
guilt of sin and the temporal punishment due to sin), so that a
person who dies in that state is not delayed in any way from
immediately entering Heaven. (The temporal punishment due to sin is
what can delay those who die in grace from immediately entering
Heaven.) One must be born again (i.e., have everything removed) to
even be justified (put into a state of grace).

Council
of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 3: “But though He died for all, yet
all do not receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom
the merit of His passion is communicated; because as truly as men
would not be born unjust, if they were not born through propagation
of the seed of Adam, since by that propagation they contract through
him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, SO
UNLESS THEY WERE BORN AGAIN IN CHRIST THEY WOULD NEVER BE JUSTIFIED,
since by that new birth through the merit of His passion the grace by
which they become just is bestowed upon them.”

Council
of Trent, Sess. 5, Original Sin, # 5, ex cathedra: “FOR
IN THOSE WHO ARE BORN AGAIN, there is nothing that God hates…
but, putting off the old man, and putting on the new who is created
according to God, are
made innocent, immaculate, pure, guiltless, and beloved of God, heirs
indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ; in
such a manner that absolutely nothing may delay them from entry into
heaven.”

The
explanation of ‘baptism of desire’ advanced by Tanquerey
and others is that ‘baptism of desire’ justifies without
granting rebirth or the removal of the temporal punishment due to
sin. That explanation is clearly false, as the teaching above proves.
The reason theologians erred so greatly in attempting to explain
‘baptism of desire’ is that the doctrine they were
defending (‘baptism of desire’) is itself false.

COMMENT

Thanks
for exposing Tanquerey’s [errors]… I also noted that
Tanquerey held that Baptism does not remit Original Sin and
infuse sanctifying grace for many (if not most) baptisees, because
they had ‘probably’ already obtained these through Desire
alone!

Where
does this nonsense stop? Confirmation of Desire? Extreme Unction of
Desire? Holy Matrimony of Desire? Ordination of Desire?!

Timothy

With
regard to his false teaching that Baptism does not remit Original Sin
for many, because it supposedly already happened prior to Baptism,
this canon is also interesting:

Council
of Trent, Sess. 5 on Original Sin, #5: “If
anyone denies
that by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ which is conferred in
baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted,
or says that the whole of that which belongs to the essence of sin is
not taken away, but says that it is only canceled or not imputed, let
him be anathema.”

COMMENT

Subject:
False Doctrine of Tanquerey

It
does, indeed, appear that many heretical priests have read Tanquerey;
for who among 'Catholics' has not perused The Spiritual Life?
I remember a Franciscan priest that gave Sunday afternoon talks on
Tanquerey's writings, back in the late 1990s - right before I
received your material (which I thank God for).

It
also appears that, in particular, Anthony Cekada has taken this false idea of Tanquerey's, quoted in
your article, as part of the infallible ordinary magisterium,
and has extended it beyond perhaps even Tanquerey's erroneous
notions. When I telephoned Cekada, he told me the same things that
Tanqueray wrote: "...perfect charity, along with at least an
implicit desire for Baptism, supplies for the forces of Baptism of
water as to remission of sins..." "It is certainly
sufficient in one who is invincibly ignorant..." "Perfect
charity, together with the desire for Baptism, indeed remits original
sin and actual sins, and in like manner infuses sanctifying grace..."

… I
told him that a person cannot have [saving]
charity [faith and hope by a baptism of
desire] until that person receives the sacrament of
baptism, for that is how we receive faith, hope and charity: the
three theological virtues (should I have to tell a 'priest'
of this truth?). The faithless heretic Cekada simply fast-talked his
way out of answering me. But Cekada made it clear that he believes
in 'invincible ignorance'… hebelieves that the
heresies held and taught currently by almost all the false
traditionalist priests - against the dogma that sacramental baptism
is absolutely necessary for salvation - are part of the 'infallible
ordinary magisterium' since 'theologians' taught and published
it in catechisms - even though it doesn't agree with the infallible
extraordinary magisterium (which Cekada and others ignore on
this issue); and he believes in, and applies 'baptism of
desire' to: Jews, Muslims and other pagans (as long as they're "nice"
Jews, Muslims and pagans).

I
counted at least five contradictions in the paragraph you quoted from
Tanquerey…

Tanqueray's
errors are really, as you say, false doctrines… It
demonstrates that those who obstinately adhere to this
particular heresy (in fact, any heresy) do not believe in Jesus
Christ. They don't. For if they did, they would not render the words
of Jesus Christ, the acts of His apostles, the works and martyrdoms
of Catholic missionaries meaningless!...

CONCERNING
THOSE BAPTIZED VALIDLY AS INFANTS BY MEMBERS OF NON-CATHOLIC SECTS

The
Catholic Church has always taught that anyone (including a layman or
a non-Catholic) can validly baptize if he adheres to proper matter
and form and if he has the intention of doing what the Church does.

Pope
Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” 1439: “In
case of necessity, however, not only a priest or a deacon, but even a
layman or woman, yes even a pagan and a heretic can baptize, so long
as he preserves the form of the Church and has the intention of doing
what the Church does.” (Denzinger 696)

The
Church has always taught that infants baptized in heretical and
schismatic churches are made Catholics, members of the Church and
subjects of the Roman Pontiff, even if the people who baptized them
are heretics who are outside the Catholic Church. This is because the
infant, being below the age of reason, cannot be a heretic or
schismatic. He cannot have an impediment which would prevent Baptism
from making him a member of the Church.

Pope
Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 13 on the Sacrament of
Baptism: “If anyone shall say that infants, because they
have not actual faith, after having received baptism are not to be
numbered among the faithful… let him be anathema.”

This
means that all validly baptized infants wherever they are, even those
baptized in heretical non-Catholic churches by heretical ministers,
are made members of the Catholic Church. They are also made subject
to the Roman Pontiff (if there is one). So, at what one point does
this baptized Catholic infant become a non-Catholic – severing
his membership in the Church and subjection to the Roman Pontiff?
After the baptized infant reaches the age of reason, he or she
becomes a heretic or a schismatic and severs his membership in the
Church and severs subjection to the Roman Pontiff when he or she
obstinately rejects any
teaching of the Catholic Church or loses Faith in the essential
mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation.

Pope
Clement VI, Super quibusdam, Sept. 20, 1351: “…We
ask: In the first place whether you and the Church of the
Armenians which is obedient to you, believe that all those
who in baptism have received the same Catholic faith, and
afterwards have withdrawn and will withdraw in the future from the
communion of this same Roman Church, which one alone is
Catholic, are schismatic and heretical, if they remain
obstinately separated from the
faith of this Roman Church. In the second place, we ask
whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of
the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the
obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved.”

So,
one must be clear on these points: 1) The unbaptized (Jews, Muslims,
Mormons, pagans, etc.) must all join the Catholic Church by receiving
valid Baptism and the Catholic Faith or they will all be lost.
2) Among those who are validly baptized as infants, they are made
Catholics, members of the Church and subjects of the Roman Pontiff by
Baptism. They only sever that membership (which they already
possess) when they obstinately reject any Catholic dogma or
believe something contrary to the essential mysteries of the Trinity
and Incarnation. In the teaching of Pope Clement VI above, we see
this second point clearly taught: all who receive the Catholic Faith
in Baptism lose that Faith and become schismatic and heretical if
they become “obstinately separated from
the faith of this Roman Church.”

The
fact is that all Protestants who reject the Catholic Church or its
dogmas on the sacraments, the Papacy, etc. have obstinately separated
from the Faith of the Roman Church and have therefore severed their
membership in the Church of Christ. The same is true with the
“Eastern Orthodox” who obstinately reject dogmas on the
Papacy and Papal Infallibility. They need to be converted to the
Catholic Faith for salvation.

The
baptized children who reach the age of reason (and become adults) in
Protestant, Eastern Schismatic, etc. church buildings and believe in
the Trinity and the Incarnation (the essential components of the
Catholic Faith) and who
don’t reject any Catholic dogma because they don’t know
of any other than the Trinity and Incarnation,
and
who don’t embrace any positions incompatible with the Catholic
faith, Faith in God, Jesus Christ, the Trinity, the Natural Law (see:
The Natural Law) or what they know to be clearly taught in Scripture, WOULD BE
CATHOLICS IN A HERETICAL CHURCH BUILDING.

Council
of Elvira, Canon 22, 300 A.D.: “If someone leaves the
Catholic Church and goes over to a heresy, and then
returns again, it is determined that penance is not to be denied to
such a one, since he has acknowledged his sin. Let him do
penance, then, for ten years, and after ten years he may come forward
to communion. If, indeed, there were children who were led
astray, since they have not sinned of their own fault, they may be
received without delay.” (The Faith of the Early
Fathers, Vol. 1: 611n)

This
means that the children above reason who were attending the church
of a heretical sect with their parents were not heretics because they
were not obstinately against something they knew to be taught by the
Church! This fact is also true of all people of all ages who go to a
heretical church without being obstinately opposed to any Church
teaching. This is exactly the Catholic position and what the
Church has always taught (as we have seen) – which is that
to be a heretic one must obstinately reject
something they know to be taught by God or the Catholic Church.

Canon
1325, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “After the reception of baptism,
if anyone, retaining the
name Christian, pertinaciously
[or obstinately] denies or doubts
something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith,
[such a one] is a heretic.”

Please
consult the following sections to learn what things one can and
cannot be ignorant about when it comes to the Catholic faith, its
teachings and dogmas – and concerning whether such a person is
to be considered a Catholic, an unbeliever or a heretic:

NO
SALVATION OUTSIDE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

The
following statements on Outside the Catholic Church There is No
Salvation are from the highest teaching authority of the Catholic
Church. They are ex cathedra Papal decrees (decrees from the
Chair of St. Peter). Therefore, they constitute the teaching given to
the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ and the Apostles. Such teachings
are unchangeable and are classified as part of the solemn magisterium
(the extraordinary teaching authority of the Catholic Church).

Pope
Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,”
1441, ex cathedra (infallible statement from the chair of
Peter): “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes,
professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic
Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics,
cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire
which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are
joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the
unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for
those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to
salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and
practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that
nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms
and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has
persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

As
we can see from this infallible statement from the chair of Peter, no
one at all can be saved unless they are joined to the Church
before the end of their lives.. Yet, many people today who call
themselves Catholic or Christian, boldly and obstinately assert the
direct opposite of this statement and claim that protestants,
heretics, Jews, schismatics and even Pagans can attain eternal life.

Pope
Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832:
“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to
persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the
Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain
eternal life.”

Pope
Eugene IV, Council of Florence, The Athanasian Creed, Sess. 8,
Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes
to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each
one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt
perish in eternity.” (Decrees of the Ecumenical
Councils, Vol. 1, pp. 550-553; Denzinger 39-40.)

Pope
Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex
cathedra: “There is indeed one universal Church of
the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which
Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice.”

Pope
Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra:
“With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the
one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe
and simply confess this Churchoutside of which there is no
salvation nor remission of sin… Furthermore, we declare, say,
define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by absolute
necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

Those
who refuse to believe in the dogma Outside the Church There is No
Salvation until they understand how there is justice in it are
simply withholding their Faith in Christ’s revelation.
Those with the true Faith in Christ (and His Church) accept His
teaching first and understand the truth in it (i.e., why
it is true) second.A Catholic does not withhold his belief in
Christ’s revelation until he can understand it.That is the
mentality of a faithless heretic who possesses insufferable pride.
St. Anselm sums up the true Catholic outlook on this point.

St.
Anselm, Doctor of the Church, Prosologion, Chap. 1: “For
I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I
believe in order to understand. For this also I believe, that
unless I believed, I should not understand.”

Copyright information: All videos and articles on our site are free to copy and share for free. Please remember to also include live links to the source of the information.
We are looking for translators who have the skill to make a good translation of important articles for the salvation of souls. We are also in need of translators who can translate Saint Bridget's Revelations into different languages. If you can help us on this important work, please contact us here.
We need your help! We are spending all the time our expenses among things like websites, webhotels, and giving away free material, dvds and books in order to warn people and tell them the truth. So if you like the material and want to help us—and be yourself a sharer—in saving souls, then please make a donation, pray for us and help us spread it in order to help our beloved brothers and sisters who have not found this information yet. If you have been graced by God with the means to do so, please support our work. Any donation that you can give is highly appreciated and much needed! Help us help our beloved brothers' and sisters' souls. Your Support Counts! All for the Glory of God and the salvation of souls! Please click here!
"And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward." Matthew 10:42